Information Management Assessment

Action Plan Review

The Department of Energy and Climate Change

April 2014 Overview

This report summarises progress made by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) since their Information Management Assessment (IMA) of 2011, and highlights areas where progress is still needed. There has been progress in many areas, particularly induction and training, knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer as well as the production of metrics for the Electronic Data Records Management system. However, the change to a new electronic records system – DECC Shares – has delayed publication, communication and implementation of its Knowledge-Sharing Strategy. This change is now imminent. DECC needs to provide direction via a well-articulated strategy grounded by a detailed implementation plan to help it embed the new technology and related new ways of working it is introducing.

Background

The Information Management Assessment (IMA) programme is the best-practice model for government bodies wishing to demonstrate commitment to the principles of good information management.

DECC’s IMA was held over one week in May 2011, with visits to the department’s offices in London and Aberdeen. The IMA report was agreed with DECC in September 2012 and published in October that year after its presentation to the Chief Operating Officer (COO) and Senior Information Risk Officer (SIRO).

A detailed action plan was published alongside the report. Progress against this was formally assessed in January 2014 and is summarised in the report below. Outstanding recommendations and areas of further work are also highlighted. Key findings of the IMA 2011

The IMA report rated DECC as ‘Good’ under three out of twenty headings on the IMA performance framework risk matrix and ‘Satisfactory’ under a further twelve headings. Five 'Development needed' areas were identified altogether. Some areas of good practice were highlighted, for example, an audit of internal datasets to uncover datasets not included in the Information Asset Register (IAR). The report also highlighted as good practice Private Office’s management of its records: they would only accept submissions that were emailed in the form of Matrix links, which ensured these key documents were captured within the Electronic Data Records Management System (EDRMS).

The IMA report made 31 recommendations for improvement, placing particular emphasis on the following concerns:

- As highlighted above, the existing knowledge sharing strategy needed to have an implementation plan, including a detailed timeline.
- The importance of the roles of the Senior Information Risk Owner (SIRO) and the Chief Information Officer (CIO) needed to be communicated to staff more effectively by the Executive Board in relation to issues of compliance on information security and assurance. In addition, both the profile and expertise of Information Managers needed to be addressed by the Knowledge and Information Management (KIM) team within DECC.
- A need to review the intranet which still had examples of BIS or Defra content rather than a DECC corporate identity.
- A need to raise awareness of the profile of the Information Asset Owner (IAO) role and to implement a training programme.
- A need to define a 'What to Keep' schedule for the Department. This would give DECC a basis from which to maintain a full record of key decisions and drive digital disposal, in line with The National Archives guidance. Private Office, as a key information hub, needed to lead by example in the way information was recorded and retained. • With the move to the new EDRMS system, a cultural change was required within DECC to ensure a significant reduction in the use of personal drives, alongside better naming conventions of documents. In addition, there was a need to understand how users were managing their email inboxes as DECC guidance on email management was being followed only by a minority of staff.

• A supporting digital continuity strategy was recommended. As part of this, a digital continuity impact assessment is needed during any IT change management process.

• A review of DECC staff training was recommended to ensure compliance with both the Data Protection Act and the Freedom of Information Act (FoIA).

• DECC’s knowledge transfer processes were highlighted and suggestions for a need to formalise this process.

Progress against recommendations

In this section, main areas of progress are recorded. Areas where further work is needed are also highlighted in bold.

The action plan review was conducted in the context of the transition to DECC Shares, a new records management system using SharePoint technology that is due to replace Matrix during 2014.

• The draft Knowledge-Sharing Strategy reviewed by the team at the time of the IMA was comprehensive and clear (with its three themes of improved information management, enabling knowledge sharing and developing a shared culture) though this Strategy, which was briefly live, is no longer active. Themes have been implemented informally, and its principles have informed current work priorities around DECC Shares. However, with no published Strategy or related plans for its implementation there are a range of risks relating to DECC’s ability to plan and take decisions in a consistent, directed and proportionate manner, especially during this transition period. between systems. DECC should address this to give clear direction on key themes such as disposal and appraisal and key goals such as culture changes.

- DECC has taken ownership of its training, providing it in-house. This allows it to deliver training that is department specific as well as significantly reducing the waiting time for new starters to receive induction training. All new starters at DECC now receive an induction session with the Departmental Records Officer (DRO) as part of their overall corporate induction. The induction covers compliance with the Data Protection Act and the FoIA as well as the importance of saving information within the EDRMS and the benefits of sharing corporate expertise and knowledge.

- DECC has written an internal two-page digital continuity strategy produced with a focus on the move to DECC Shares and the need to ensure metadata, and content are maintained when information is migrated between systems. Once the move to DECC Shares is complete, DECC should build on this thinking and ensure that digital continuity principles are incorporated in its long-term KIM strategy and that it is actively planning to maintain the completeness, availability and usability of its information over time and through change.

- Usage statistics of the current EDRMS system have continued to be collected on a monthly basis and reported at a local level. Although overall use of the system has been low, there has been a continued drive to monitor its use and a change has been implemented, redefining the number of records needed to be saved monthly from 1 to 4 to qualify as an ‘active user’. With the imminent change of EDRMS to DECC Shares, the precedent of active monitoring of use means such metrics are already embedded and expected. There is potential for using these statistics more actively: (a) with the better predicted usage of the new DECC Shares in capturing corporate information and records, the data has the potential to be analysed on an annual basis to help plan for future digital transfer to The National Archives; (b) to improve targeting of users or groups of users under-utilising the system. At the moment, numbers of active or passive users by group or directorate are reported. This process could be refined by analysing percentages of users and comparing across groups/directorates to identify and challenge relatively poor performing groups.

- Given the time constraints of the DECC Shares project, The National Archives recognises DECC's efforts to consult with users to build appropriate requirements. The new system promises to be more intuitive and there is good buy-in at senior level. The timescale does create some risks for successful implementation and transfer of data but the move also creates opportunities for a cultural change towards better usage compared to the EDRMS. This includes DECC's intention to review the use of shared drives following the implementation of DECC Shares, and where possible remove them and to tackle users storing information in personal drives. The existing principle of applying functional limits to email use should be maintained to support the cultural transition to a more corporate way of storing, sharing and accessing information. This is currently achieved by deleting all emails older than 12 months, limiting the size of inboxes and removing the ability to save older emails as .pst files.

- On first launch, DECC Shares will not have a retention disposal facility so it will be important to make a clear timetable and plan for its introduction. DECC is already making plans for this with a new jobholder recruited. The National Archives can support and advise DECC on developing this guidance, and how to monitor future compliance by users with the guidance. • DECC has completed a review of all records managed in its current EDRMS and has identified records that can be disposed once they have been transferred to DECC Shares. DECC states that they are on track on the 20-year transfer rule.

• There has been progress towards strengthening the role of Information Managers, including a statement of the importance of the role by the COO. The statement establishes the need for IMs to allocate 10% of their time to IM work and their objectives are expected to reflect this. A Community of Practice for Information Managers (IM) has been set up on the new intranet and this has potential for knowledge sharing, especially as DECC Shares is implemented. With the new DECC Shares user group (many of whom are not existing Information Managers), whose role is to develop – and help implement - the new system, there is potential to refresh the IM pool and improve the IM role. All IMs will receive training on DECC Shares.

• Following the IMA, the DECC SIRO is recognised as adopting a prominent role in the Department. Senior roles covering information management have been subject to some staff turnover but changes appear to have been well managed and a new SIRO has been appointed at DG level.

• A corporate risk manager has been appointed since the time of the IMA. There is also now a requirement to consult the DRO on new projects. This is a useful means of helping to reduce the risk that corporate guidance may not be followed. This is good practice but more could be done to get an overview of risk throughout the business groups. Individual risk registers across the Department reportedly document information risk but there is no overall sense of the information risks affecting DECC as a whole, or which areas of the business may be most – or least – vulnerable. • The Knowledge Transfer processes reviewed by The National Archives demonstrated good practice. Good knowledge transfer tools have been developed and made available on the intranet, for example, for ‘after action reviews’ and some of these ideas have been embedded in current leadership training.

• The Knowledge Sharing Action Plan is to be commended, although it is not currently linked to a live KIM strategy. Knowledge sharing within DECC is an area of good practice and it has built on the good start demonstrated via DECC School and DECC School Lite. DECC also runs Knowledge Sharing Sessions as part of its Leadership Development Programme, run by a recognised expert in this field. Since its inception over 200 staff have attended. The intranet project has created a better searchable resource and enhanced personal profiles.

• Though internal training has been delivered to Information Asset Owners (IAOs), DECC acknowledges more needs to be done to strengthen their role and DECC should consult The National Archives on this. IAOs need to be referenced in the records management policy and a clear definition given of what an information asset is. DECC has recently completed a review of its Information Asset Register (IAR). The template does not support routine collection of content relating to transparency or reuse potential or the documentation of usability requirements in line with The National Archives guidance. However, the template does allow retention requirements and purpose to be captured. DECC should liaise with The National Archives to increase the scope of its IAR and the benefit it receives from using this document. Next Steps

The assessment team will continue to work closely with DECC through the action plan monitoring process and standard meetings with the departmental Information Management Consultant (IMC). Further progress review meetings will be scheduled to measure progress against outstanding recommendations. Closure of the action plan, progress against any outstanding recommendations will be reviewed at the time of the next formal IMA in 2015/16.

Risk Matrix

The table below recognises progress made by DECC since the original assessment. As the Action Plan Review focused on specific areas only areas of significant change are noted in the Matrix.

| Governance and Leadership | Assessed 2011 | Reviewed 2014 | |---------------------------|---------------|---------------| | Strategic management | | | | Business objectives | | | | Management controls | | | | Resourcing | | | | Risk management | | | | Records Management | | | | Creation | | | | Storage | | | | Category | | | |----------------------------------------------|---|---| | Appraisal, disposal and transfer | | | | Sustainability of digital records | | | | Management | | | | **Access to Information** | | | | FOI/Data Protection | | | | Re-use | | | | Security | | | | **Compliance** | | | | Staff responsibilities and delegations | | | | Policies and guidance | | | | Training | | | | Change management | | | | **Culture** | | | | Commitment | | | | Staff understanding | | | | Knowledge management | | | | Key to colour coding | |------------------------------| | ![Best Practice](image) | | Best Practice | | ![Good](image) | | Good | | ![Satisfactory](image) | | Satisfactory | | ![Development Needed](image) | | Development Needed | | ![Priority Attention Area](image) | | Priority Attention Area |